ICE ICE Baby

Attorneys, who wouldn't be defending people who shouldn't be here at all, are worried that the rights (of clients that they don't have the right to have) are being violated by a system that is not responsible to them but to citizens.

And what kind of message does this procedure send?

Don't come here illegally or you'll get arrested! Maybe not today & maybe not tomorrow, but if ICE finds out you are an illegal your interests and concerns become moot.

So when it comes to Illegal immigration and that problem, what people are choosing to do is maintain the status quo. They choose this over upholding a law that has been long ignored (to the benefit of some people and the detriment of others.)

If you are not a citizen of this country, US Citizens rights do not pertain to you.

If I go to France (just a wild example because I would never degrade myself that low) but just saying that I went to France and I broke their law.

My rights as an American do not apply while I am on trial in France. I have to abide by their laws and rules and processes.

To make it even more simple for those that are having a hard time wrapping their head around this, if I leave Kentucky and I go to New York or California (again I wouldn't degrade myself to that level, but again just using it as an example) I have to follow all laws that that are in NY or California. And if I do not, I could be arrested, prosecuted and jailed while in the state of NY or California.

"Okay. The courthouse is home base. As long as you're touching it, you can't be tagged out."

Click to expand...

That's how they have been treating the US of A for the past 40 years.

Anyhow, this morning there was dissatisfaction from the judge over the fact that ice had disrupted his schedule and now he expects that a lot of people won't show up to court at all.

Okay, is this the same court system that claims that they are so overburdened that they can't properly observe the laws?

Hey those guys are NOT coming to court! Get caught up on your schedule now!

Take a day off!

Clearly you folks need some time to get your thoughts together on this matter and remember that you are American citizens protecting American citizens from those who are not American citizens!

Any lawyer or judge who has a problem with that should find another occupation.

But when you start screwing with the language you can make things look their opposite.

From the Fresno flea this morning...

She completely ignores the fact that if local and state governments interfere with the federal law, and protect illegal aliens from the law, then they become complicit in the crime of Border jumping.

This is a conspiracy of the largest type. Cities and jurisdictions across California are lining up to either defend the Constitution or defend the illegals.

Nobody has the right to treatment as a citizen in a country where they are not a citizen. Referring to their criminal status as a citizenship status ignores the fact that foreign felons do not have the right to US citizenship.

IIRC, People jumping our borders technically lose all rights to citizenship until they are cleared by a judge for that crime.

If you are here illegally you have no "citizenship status", because it is not legal for you to become a citizen at that point, without some special dispensation.

I usually try to refrain from calling people that I don't know names most of the time based on a quote that I read, but when you say stupid things, it makes me think that is the roof of your intelligence level. And when that intelligence level is several floors below common sense that says if you're not supposed to be in a country, and you are found ANYWHERE inside that country regardless of whether it was hiding in an outhouse on the back roads of route 66, or the state supreme court, is of little difference in the eyes of the laws that says if you are here and are not supposed to be, and are caught being here when you're not supposed to be, that we have a right to remove you from being here.

I wonder how Ms. Romani would feel about finding an intruder in her closet? I bet she would have a really different opinion about wanting that person removed in a hurry.

That's just it, there is no distinction between the two situations. If you're not supposed to be here, GTFO.

By the way, I didn't mention that the guy they picked up at the courthouse in this case was indeed illegal, and had been deported several times previously.

His attorney is an officer of the court and if in fact this attorney knew these facts before taking the case ( that his client was illegal and had been repeatedly deported) he should be censured by a judge. Not disbarred perhaps, but at least fined and admonished, if not jailed.

Then again Clinton got disbarred for lying to the court, so what the hell . . . disbar them!

An officer of the Court who witnesses a crime and does not report it, or who knows of a crime and obscures the fact, is guilty of a great deal in the eyes of the law.